Skip to main content

About your Search

20130724
20130801
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
to updated information i received from the department of defense just yesterday on time of day detention cost for fiscal year 2012 are $448 million m. for fiscal year 2013 estimated at $454 million. do the math. 166 prisoners, $454 million. we are spending $2.7 million per year for each detainee held at guantÁnamo bay. what does it cost to put a prisoner and keep him in the safest and most secure prison in america in florence colorado? $78,000 a year. against 2.7 million we are spending at guantÁnamo. this would be fiscally responsible during ordinary economic times but it's even worse when the department of defense are struggling to deal with the impact of sequestration including the furloughs and cutbacks in training for our troops. every day the soldiers and sailors serving at guantÁnamo are doing a magnificent job under difficult circumstances. i went to the southern command in miami and i met with the men who were in charge of this responsibility. i can tell you that they are saddened by this assignment that they are doing exactly what they're supposed to do. at great risk and great s
as secretary of defense being lambasted for saying you go to war with the army that you have. he was absolutely right. it sounded callous at the time but would you have to do is remain flexible. one of the things i had run into in researching this story and doing the story was if other opponents know that counterinsurgency is difficult for us and we are moving away from that and not applying mraps mraps will they adopt the strategies to hit us in our weak spot. it's absolutely true. for that reason i think a lot of the lessons that were learned in iraq and afghanistan despite some distaste for warfare need to be maintained. i'm not a big fan of getting rid of all but mraps that we spend tens of millions of dollars on. we may need them again but the idea that you are training for the last war at least in this case is not what they are doing. they are trying to train for what they think would be another war instead of a small war or counterinsurgency. i would like to think that they are flexible enough to be able to do both to preserve those lessons but the really scary emerging threats are happe
ought to be on the table, particularly defense spending. but future debt comes from the into side of the budget that remains untouched and that's the explosion of programs like social security. but we -- there's been a lot of threats -- we were told that the sky was going to fall, and "washington post" did a story of looking at the 46 myth wes have heard, automatic actually materialized, and only 11 and one of the things that is interesting this week to talk about when we talk about sequestration -- which is a very small opt -- amount of money which mostly affected the growth of spending. it's kind of -- don't really know how it's going to play out because government agencies have the ability to -- we have heard that it was going to be devastating for defense contractors, and they were going to -- just announced their profit and they're up 10% in spite of sequestration. so i think there's just a lot of hand-waving, threatening people, and that it's not going to be -- again, we agree, not the best way to go about cutting spending or being fiscally responsible, but i don't think all
not support the irish rule. do not iris finalizes tax credit will it offered no substantive defense of his decision to extend tax credits through federal changes. a cursory statement verified no provision of tax credits are to identify any relevant legislative history to support its position. hard to see how this rulemaking satisfied the apa requirements in recent decision-making. to this day neither the iris for supporters have been able to come up with the statement prayer to or contemporaneous to the packers -- passing of the act. there are many statements available in all 50 states as there are many statements at all 50 states would eagerly create and implement exchanges. there even statements that states be required to create exchanges. something definitely federal government cannot compel. what there is not as a single statement saying the tax credit would be available in federal exchanges because no one assumed that the federal exchanges will be necessary which explains why they opted not provide any funding for the federal exchange months after the rule was issued after members of
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4